Godet Oak Leaf ?

[e-maus]

Hi
Quote from the dealer website
"Oak Leaf "21" to 1939 Knight's Cross
Textbook Godet made Oak Leaf to the 1939 Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross.
"21" maker marked. "900" silver stamped. Collectors call this a type 2. A very dark, nearly black, patina to the front mainly. One corroded area to the reverse. 7-8 o' clock position."

Corrosion of silver?. I have my doubts, IMO this can be dear blunder
All opinions appreciated

Jacek

[Dietrich Maerz]

I have my doubts ....
May I ask who the dealer is?

Dietrich

[e-maus]

I wanted to speak softly . Of course we value his, anyone can make a mistake
Jacek

http://www.ratisbons.com/13th-Contem...t-s-Cross.html

[Dietrich Maerz]

The problem with the photos is that one cannot see any obverse pebbling pattern or features. I also have not heard that silver, as a precious metal, can corrode. Maybe one needs to have the piece in hand, but that one looks surely extremely strange on the photos!

[e-maus]

The problem with the photos is that one cannot see any obverse pebbling pattern or features. I also have not heard that silver, as a precious metal, can corrode. Maybe one needs to have the piece in hand, but that one looks surely extremely strange on the photos!

Because what we see in the pictures this is not what we want to see. This is not neither the first nor the second model Godet OAK. IMO MM is also not correct.
Thanks for your time, maybe someone protects their money back
Jacek

[Bilzo]

The problem with the photos is that one cannot see any obverse pebbling pattern or features. I also have not heard that silver, as a precious metal, can corrode. Maybe one needs to have the piece in hand, but that one looks surely extremely strange on the photos!

Silver in a poor storage environment or exposed to air and moisture for long periods of time, will corrode. Gold and platinum won't but Silver will.

[Dietrich Maerz]

Okay, I buy that. However, that relates more to what is stated below:

"Corrosionpedia explains Silver Corrosion
When silver is attacked by sulfur, the chemical reaction leaves the metal with a brown-black patina which does not result in much metal loss. The attack also results in black fissures and pits. The rate of pitting attack is generally slow, but can increase if a stronger acid or salts are present. Salts catalyze the reaction, thus increasing the rate of attack. This is evident in salt dishes as well as in mustard pots. Rubber bands contain sulfur, which is why rubber leaves black stripes on the metal. The black product left after sulfur corrosion is the chemical corrosion of the silver metal, and not a stain. When the black product is removed by polishing, a thin layer of the base silver metal is actually being removed."

Under corrosion the normal people understand something like rust and slow decay of material until nothing is left.

[Jelle M.]

I don't see any of the typical die flaws on the obverse...

[juoneen]

Okay, I buy that. However, that relates more to what is stated below:

"Corrosionpedia explains Silver Corrosion
When silver is attacked by sulfur, the chemical reaction leaves the metal with a brown-black patina which does not result in much metal loss. The attack also results in black fissures and pits. The rate of pitting attack is generally slow, but can increase if a stronger acid or salts are present. Salts catalyze the reaction, thus increasing the rate of attack. This is evident in salt dishes as well as in mustard pots. Rubber bands contain sulfur, which is why rubber leaves black stripes on the metal. The black product left after sulfur corrosion is the chemical corrosion of the silver metal, and not a stain. When the black product is removed by polishing, a thin layer of the base silver metal is actually being removed."

Under corrosion the normal people understand something like rust and slow decay of material until nothing is left.

The normal people also realize that when for example items of silver are interred in the earth with a human body, there are more chemicals present eventually than merely sulphur.
What you say may be true, but we are not sure where this set of oaks were found or what types of other things were present , like even earthen chemicals it may have been exposed to. (How bout vehicle battery acid or ?)

Here is the chemical scenario , in case it was buried within a grave, so I wonder how the list in this case could effect silver IF this were the case, as sulphur is what you have focused in on only , so the possibilities should be stated for all possible chemicals effects on 900 silver , not just sulphur wouldn't you think?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chem..._decomposition

I also seem to recall at one point not too many years back Dietrich, you were of the 100% positive opinion that there were no such dies for a 900 21 set of oak leaves and there were no oakleaves ever made with this mark that were authentic....until detlev nieman argued successfully the provenance of a set from a German generals son his father had been awarded, then immediately your book was amended to included that newly accepted information.

How many different sets of dies could have been used to make 900 21 oakleaves then is anybody's guess, so the normal "die flaw" argument as a judgement for authenticity for just certain die flaws from one set known to have been authentic may not be the only ones that could be definitively claimed valid , and, until the detlev argument(search the threads and see) you were not a believer Dietrich , on any of any 900 21 oaks being authentic.

So in lieu of things like this changing the information known about 900 21 oakleaves, or oaks and swords being so newly discovered to be authentic, how can anyone be 100% certain these types must only possess just certain carachteristics you decide from one set to be the gospel to judge every set by as final word to be authentic or not ?
Of course we all would appreciate knowing more details as to where this set was discovered, as I am not suggesting this set is authentic or a reproduction just pointing out regarding this type marked oakleaves they are little known as to all thee is to know , just the tip of the iceberg has been discovered .

Can the person posting them please tell us more of what he knows about this set IF anything is known?

[butschekantiques]

Hello everyone,

Thanks for the feedback on this set!

I believe the dark and thick patina makes this one hard to judge by pictures.
I believe it is good one however, if it turns out to be wrong I will of course withdraw it from auction.

Dietrich, I would be happy to Fedex it for inspection to you if that is ok?

Thanks!
Klaus

[e-maus]

Yet only my 3 cents. Silver does not corrode, on its surface are formed oxides / mostly of sulfur /. This piece looks at the non-magnetic silver plated alloy. Color oxidation is similar to Alpaca Honor Goblet of Lw. but of course we wait of hand inspection
Jacek

[Ludwig]

Yet only my 3 cents. Silver does not corrode, on its surface are formed oxides / mostly of sulfur /. This piece looks at the non-magnetic silver plated alloy. Color oxidation is similar to Alpaca Honor Goblet of Lw. but of course we wait of hand inspection
Jacek

Agree! This is – IMO – a very strange looking OL. I hope that Dietrich is willing to inspect it! Would be very interesting to know.

[Dietrich Maerz]

I also seem to recall at one point not too many years back Dietrich, you were of the 100% positive opinion that there were no such dies for a 900 21 set of oak leaves and there were no oakleaves ever made with this mark that were authentic....until detlev nieman argued successfully the provenance of a set from a German generals son his father had been awarded, then immediately your book was amended to included that newly accepted information.

If I recall correctly we were talking about a Type I which was marked as a Type II. Nearly everybody fell for it since the obverse was so shiny that no clear die features were visible and the reverse was photograhed poorly. It was cleared up and what I took from it was that there are transitional pieces (and that one needs Oaksleaves and Swords in hand to be sure...). But never, ever was there a new or different die, it was the die for the normally L/50 marked type. I never amended my book, there would be no reason to because both dies are shown.

How many different sets of dies could have been used to make 900 21 oakleaves then is anybody's guess, so the normal "die flaw" argument as a judgement for authenticity for just certain die flaws from one set known to have been authentic may not be the only ones that could be definitively claimed valid , and, until the detlev argument(search the threads and see) you were not a believer Dietrich , on any of any 900 21 oaks being authentic.

There were only two GENUINE dies for the Type I and Type II Oakleaves. Of course, there are those who believe that anything stamped with L/50. 21, 800, 900, .. and has the shape remotely resembling the shape of Oakleaves, is genuine. Why would I not believe in 900 21 if this type is in my book?

So in lieu of things like this changing the information known about 900 21 oakleaves, or oaks and swords being so newly discovered to be authentic, how can anyone be 100% certain these types must only possess just certain carachteristics you decide from one set to be the gospel to judge every set by as final word to be authentic or not ?

I don't know how deep you are into statistics, but if 100% of all Oakleaves with 100% solid provenance are all from the same dies it tells something. If a Type I die is stamped 900 21 it is not a newly discovered die but a transitional piece. There never was nor is there a "newly discovered" genuine die.

Of course we all would appreciate knowing more details as to where this set was discovered, as I am not suggesting this set is authentic or a reproduction just pointing out regarding this type marked oakleaves they are little known as to all thee is to know, just the tip of the iceberg has been discovered .

What are you talking about? If you only see the tip of the iceberg that does not mean that some other people don't know the full extend of it.

It will be interesting to have the piece in hand.